Read’s Notebook, 1.[*]
Supreme Court of Delaware.
November, 1793.
Case for these words, “You killed your child and wounded your wife, and I can prove it.”
The counsel for the defendant urged in his defense before the jury that the words were not spoken with an evil intention and that it laid on the plaintiff to prove the malice, and read 4 Bac. Abr. 499 to show that words drawn from defendant by challenging were not actionable.
Plaintiff’s counsel argued that if words were spoken out of concern and with no evil intention, it should have been taken advantage of by justification, 2 Esp.N.P. 260; that malice need not be proved, it being part of the definition of slander, 4 Bl. Comm. 125, and that those words the native consequence of which is a damage to the person of whom spoken are accounted malicious in law.
Of this opinion was the Court, who in the direction to the jury said that if the jury were satisfied by the testimony offered that the words were spoken, they imported malice, and no proof of it was therefore necessary on the part of the plaintiff.
Verdict for plaintiff. Damages three shillings, nine pence.
Miller and Read for plaintiff. Bayard, Wilson and Batson for defendant.
Page 3